Page 2
---
University Daily Kansan Fridav. Mav 19.1961
Students Shortsighted
The situation that has arisen with the student petition denouncing the reserved seating plan is somewhat analogous to that which arose during Woodrow Wilson's administration.
Wilson's plan was to give the people an institution through which they would benefit, the League of Nations. He asked for, but was refused by the people and their representatives in Congress, an institution by which the world and the United States could make mutual gains.
BUT THE PEOPLE WERE AFRAID OF ANY change. They felt they were capable of recognizing any world or national problems. They did not want the president and his aides to make any decisions for them.
KU students are guilty of the same shortsightedness that plagued the citizens during Wilson's administration—they are not able to see beyond their own personal desires and wishes.
The public during Wilson's campaign for the League felt it needed no new ideas and plans.
THERE IS, OF COURSE, A GREAT DIFFERENCE between Wilson and the League and the KU student and the reserved seating bill, but there is a valid similarity between the attitudes of the people in 1919 and the KU students today.
KU students seem satisfied to wait in line outside Memorial Stadium for several hours to push and shove to find a seat inside. They seem willing to let this continue rather than to take an intelligent stand on a progressive piece of legislation approved by student representatives who feel they have the best interests of the students in mind.
Seating board committee members have spent much time communicating with other universities, sounding out their ideas and suggestions. The result is an amalgamation of the best parts of each plan into a solution that will work on the KU campus.
Do students who have not taken the time nor spent the effort carefully studying the plans of other universities and the needs of KU know what is best for them?
But the point here is that seating board committee members have recognized a need on the campus and are delving into it to find an answer.
The administration could interpret the petition to mean that the student body feels the ASC representatives are not qualified to decide what is best for the students. If this petition were interpreted in this manner, the administration can and has indicated it might take the seating problem out of the hands of the ASC and enact one of its own. The plan from the administration might be less satisfactory to the student body than the present one.
They have formed a sensible,reasonable plan. It is one that can work with cooperation and understanding from the students.
Carrie Merryfield
Editor:
Against Seating Plan
Arise Students! Let's not allow ourselves to be pushed into something which is so illogical as the reserve seating plan passed by that group which CLAIMS to represent the student body, the ASC.
Monday a few privileged students will be allowed to PURCHASE reserved seat tickets to next fall's football games. After Tuesday less privileged students will be allowed to PURCHASE their seats, slowly going down the class rank until next fall's freshmen and new students will have a choice of WHAT IS LEFT.
DON'T SUPPORT THIS ACTION of the ASC because it has so many faults that it is nothing short of STUFID. Why should we have to pay twice for attending activities? We pay a $24.00 activity fee each year along with our other fees. The ASC says that the $1.50 is to cover printing and administrative costs; surely it doesn't cost $1.50 to print and sell five tickets; or are they printed with 24 carat gold ink?
The ASC says that the main reason that this bill was passed was to eliminate the mob of people crowding into the stadium before games, but let's stop and think. Will it really help? I don't think so because all that will happen is the mob will be arriving at the stadium at 1:00 or 1:20 instead of earlier as they have before. A person connected with the ASC told me that this problem would be solved by opening more gates. This is all that was needed in the first place, so why should we be forced to pay $1.50 to attend the games?
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE every member of the ASC who voted for this bill stop and think of the freshmen and new students who will enter KU next fall. Is it going to help make them feel a part of the University when they are told that there no longer are any
... Letters ...
good seats, that all of the upper classmen have them and they must take what is left?
I would also like to know what guarantee we have that the idea of forcing students to purchase reserved seats will stop at the $1.50 price, or at football. Perhaps very soon we will have to purchase reserved seat tickets for basketball games, university theater productions, and even our place in the Strong basement coffee line!
I'm not sure just what we should do now that the bill has been passed, but perhaps it would be a good thing if we were to stay home next fall and listen to the games on the radio.
Edbert Miller, Valley Center senior
** * * **
For Seating Plan
I am for the All Student Council reserved seating plan, and would like to point out a few facts that I have learned from attending two All Student Council meetings:
1. Married Students. This plan would be almost impossible to beat as they would not have to arrive at the stadium until one o'clock, or later, and would have no trouble locating their seats. This would also alleviate the expense in hiring a baby-sitter at 10:00 on game morning.
2. GREEKS AND OTHER ORGANIZED living groups. These organizations would have three or four blocks of seats, which could be traded within the houses to enable couples to sit together.
3. Independents, and residents of loosely organized dormitories and Halls who want to take dates. These students have the biggest problem seating their dates. The only solution that I can see is to get as many friends as possible together and buy the seats in a group. This would allow some flexibility in trading around to facilitate sitting
with one's date. Although this is the hardest hit group a few friends can help a great deal.
4. Stags. A single student has few or no problems that I can see in finding a single seat.
IN DEFENSE OF THE SENIORITY system. It is my understanding that the athletic association first fills applications of previous season ticket holders before it fills those of new applicants. The seniority system in the present plan is based upon similar reasoning. Theoretically, a senior has supported the team for four years.
In conclusion, I will agree that this plan is not perfect but it is head and shoulders above the "mob at the gate system" and far superior to any other I have heard of.
Telephone VIking 3-2700 Extension 711, news room Extension 376, business office
Let's give it a chance!
John R. Alden Wellsville junior
Daily Hansan
***
With the echo of payola, price-fixing and the like crashing on the ears, an additional sticky mess here or there hardly gives cause for raising the eyebrow, yet Karen Kirk's May 15th article: "Unclaimed Greek Coeds are 463 to Total 675," if not construed as a mere philological quirk, could smack of a new and scandalous twist in American decadence. We refer to the disclosure: 43 sorority women on campus "are lavalieried . . ."
The Case for Lavaliering Editor;
A TRIP TO THE REFERENCE works reveals that the word stands in a long tradition associated with Duchess La Valliere, erstwhile mistress of Louis XIV. As it goes, Louis made his position to roving courtiers quite clear by having the Duchess sport his chamber key on her necklace. The idea caught on. Courtiers began giving mistresses keys and no one began encoaching on another's key-bearer.
University of Kansas student newspaper
Member Inland Daily Press Association. Associated Collegiate Press. Represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50 St., New York 22, N.Y. News service: United Press International. Mail subscription rates: $3 a semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays, University holidays and examination periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas.
Founded 1889, became biweekly 1904, triweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912.
Perhaps in our case an erudite semantic explanation would seem in order, at least it would help to dispell the spurious vision of 43 ugly keys besmudging the world of drip-drv blouses. In any event we hope the key-motive beginning with Louis and more recently extolled by Jack Lemon has not become a symbol of the Western way of things. Or can it be that la dolce vita has all too soon found its way to the flower of American womanhood? This should never be!
E. Weissenborn
Rochester, N. Y.
Graduate Student
LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS
"I THOUGHT THE ASSOCIATED STUDENTS' HAZING COMMITTEE RULED OUT PADDling."
---
Does KU Care?
By John L. Hodge Kansas City, Kan., senior
There seems to be an amazing difference between the attitudes of the administrations of two universities separated by only 500 miles. At one university there is a consistent policy against racial and religious discrimination in any matter which might affect its students. At the other, a line has been drawn between the campus and the surrounding community such that discrimination is banned in the former, condoned in the latter. At the first university, any renter who discriminates against a university student because of his race, religion, or national origin has action taken promptly against him—a simple economic reprisal of removing that renter's name from the list of the housing office.
Similarly, the first university has made no artificial distinctions between university housing, non-university housing, and fraternities, for as of September, 1961, the latter will come under the consistent anti-discrimination policies of the university. At the other university there is no such policy. University housing is sharply distinguished from non-university housing and fraternities. The latter two may discriminate at will without the least fear of reprisal.
AT THE FORMER, a member of a minority group is a part of the campus and town communities; he can know what it is like to be considered as a social equal; he can know that no matter where he happens to go, the university will stand behind him. At the latter university, this confidence is lacking. He does not know where to go or what to do once he leaves the campus grounds. He can not be assured of obtaining a decent apartment or room in private housing. He can not be assured of being looked upon as a human being in any local "night-spot"—nor even can he be assured of a simple haircut.
The first university lies on a gentle slope in Boulder, Colorado, with a broad plain on one side, and snow-capped mountains on the other. The latter lies on a hill surrounded by a wide green valley—in Lawrence, Kansas.
IT IS CONFUSING to the student to hear that this university believes strongly in the fundamental rights of all human beings, but that it does not care enough about its students to see that they can obtain decent housing in the community. It is more confusing to hear that this university infringes upon the "right" of a renter to allow the student to do as he pleases in the apartment, for the student is not supposed to even drink beer in his apartment, but yet to see that the renter's "right" is not infringed upon when it comes to his "right" to discriminate.
From these inconsistencies it would seem that this university is not interested in the welfare of all its students, or, if so, only to the extent that it does not conflict with the prevailing conservative atmosphere of the community and the state. If a member of a minority group were to ask me which of these two Big Eight schools to attend. I am afraid that my answer would be clear and unambiguous.
If there are any reasons for what seems to be gross inconsistencies in the University's policy, shouldn't the University let its students know what these reasons are? If there are no such reasons, shouldn't the University seek to quickly remedy this situation?
I am afraid that unless the University either presents reasons for what seems to be gross inconsistencies, or quickly changes its policy, that the only conclusion to be drawn is that this university, like its students, is too apathetic to act or to care.